9200SE or MX440 ?

Ssseth · Feb 4, 2004

I've been looking all over the place and have not yet been able to find any head-to-head benchmarks on these two video cards

Radeon 9200SE 8x 128MB
Geforce4 MX440 8x 64MB

I originally though the 9200SE would be better... but looking at the clock speeds it is no longer so apparent...

9200SE 200MHz/400MHz
MX440 (8x) 275MHz/500MHz

I've read somewhere that the extra 64MB of memory is basically worthless on such a 'slow' card so I don't think it is a big factor...

Which one would you buy (if you had to) and why?
It's for a friend who is a VERY modest budget and both will beat his current VIA Unicrome onboard video crap so don't go saying "neither, they both suck" because I know that

Thanks in advance for any advice.

(I know this may be coming so I'll say right now that I can't get a FX5200, they are $30-40 more then the above cards)

cleeve · Feb 4, 2004

Both of these cards are horrible. It really doesn't matter which is better, becuase they both suck. Badly.

How cheap did you find them? You can get a Geforce4 Ti4200 for as little as $85 online. Or maybe even a 9600 SE.

If you really need to save those extra $$, I think I recommend the 9200SE just because it's DirectX 8 class at least. Although the Geforce4 MX is probably a little faster, but it has absolutely no shaders.

Nah, scratch that. I can't recommend either... it's the devil's choice. Both cards are really bad.

If you're that poor, better options are the Geforce3 Ti200... You can find those for $56 on price watch.
Or any 9000/9100/9200 non SE, you should be able to find those around $60 for sure. Keep your eyes open for a 9000 PRO, that'd be a decent low-end card if you can find one cheap enough.

________________
Radeon 9500 PRO (hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)
AthlonXP 2600+ (o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)
3dMark03: 4,055

Ssseth · Feb 4, 2004

Although I appreciate the reply, did you not see the: "It's for a friend who is a VERY modest budget and both will beat his current VIA Unicrome onboard video crap so don't go saying "neither, they both suck" because I know that"?

Online purchase is not an option.
It's either one of these two cards or he sticks with onboard 32MB shared VIA Unicrome gfx. You have to admit these options are 3x better then that p.o.s.

I just want to know which one is better and why.
Thanks again.

cleeve · Feb 4, 2004

I can't recommend either. They both suck.

Or put another way, it doesn't matter which card they get.

Although if you read my post carefully you'll see an answer in there, which I will re-paraphrase: You can either choose DirectX 8 functionality (The Radeon) or higher bandwidth (the GeforceMX).

As to which one is better, it entirely depends on the games they will play, and which of those two options works best with that game.

________________
Radeon 9500 PRO (hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)
AthlonXP 2600+ (o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)
3dMark03: 4,055

Ssseth · Feb 4, 2004

Thanks again.
Like I've said, they are better then the cheap onboard he is using right now right?... I'm not looking for anyone to recommend them, just help with picking which one is better.

I just want to know overall which would be better for playing a wide variety of games. He has no problems playing at 800x600 with everything turned to low settings no AA/Anti.

I wish I could have found some head-to-head benchmarks because I really don't know which one to get...

Oh the MX440 is $10 cheaper if that helps.

cleeve · Feb 4, 2004

If he plays a wide variety of games, it doesn't really matter which card he picks.

Toss a coin.

________________
Radeon 9500 PRO (hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)
AthlonXP 2600+ (o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)
3dMark03: 4,055

Vapor · Feb 4, 2004

Just get the MX440 if it's $10 cheaper.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.

Ssseth · Feb 4, 2004

Does either card overclock better then the other? That may help me choose.

What it comes down to it he has already bought the 9200SE, but after looking around I'm afraid I recommended the wrong one of the two. He can still exchange for the MX440 before I do the work for him (on Friday).

kostasthegreek · Feb 4, 2004

I agree,take the geforce 4 mx 440.

Ssseth · Feb 5, 2004

"I agree,take the geforce 4 mx 440."

Could you claify as to why I should pick it?
Thanks!

Ssseth · Feb 5, 2004

Oh one last thing. Anyone know the overclocking potential of either card?

Vapor · Feb 5, 2004

Reason: it's cheaper. AFAIK, the GeForce will OC more--shouldn't make a difference, you won't get any improvement that would allow you to increase settings.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.

Ssseth · Feb 5, 2004

After further investigation it appears the 9200SE is locked so that you can not over clock it at all. Hmmmm interesting.

After further investigating it appears the the cheaper MX440 is quite a bit better for games then the 9200SE...

Anyone with any more comments?

hogfather · Feb 5, 2004

Yeah, I'll throw in my two cents here.

MX440 - owned one for 1.5 years now, and I have no problem with any games so far - UT2003, GP4, F1 Championship 99-02, Halo, Elite Force 2, etc. I know its flaws - dx7, no shaders, basically a suped up gf2 mx (so everyone says, but let me assure you, this card is good). Okay its not gonna run HL2 or Doom 3 at full setings, but it'll be playable at 1024x768, low settings imo.

The SE cards are absolutely rubbish, and the 9200 is terrible. The mx440 might be old, but its good, go with that. ps never had any overheating issues or performance issue - this card is not the 8x version either.

XP2000, 256ddr 2100ram, GF4 MX440, XP Pro

cleeve · Feb 5, 2004

That's pretty harsh, Hogfather.

Have you ever even tried a 9200SE? Because in real life it aint so bad compared to an MX440, I can assure you...

________________
Radeon 9500 PRO (hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)
AthlonXP 2600+ (o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)
3dMark03: 4,055

pauldh · Feb 5, 2004

I'd say the GF4-440MX of the two, BUT, what myself, and proabably most people here, can't understand is your concrete decision it has to be one of those 2 cards and nothing else. Why is online out? People are just trying to help you/your friend get a better card. If online wasn't out you sometimes find GF3Ti200 or Radeon 8500le refurbs for cheaper than a new 9200se or GF4MX440. No comparison in speed. Unless of course your friend is choosing between 2 used cards at a super cheap price. But saying that would explain the situation more.

So, 440MX because it is a little quicker in older games and $10 cheaper (which I hope is close to 20-25% cheaper), and neither will play the newest games well. But the smartest choice may be openning your minds up to other options people mention.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9500 Pro, Santa Cruz, Antec 1000AMG, TruePower 430watt

kostasthegreek · Feb 5, 2004

As a conclusion i would say that the 9200se has better shaders than the geforce 4 mx 440 but the nVidia's video card is a little bit faster and it can be overclocked in opposition to the ati's card which is locked.Except that is 10 bucks cheaper than the 9200se(as you said).I made a summary for you but you have to make the selection according to your needs.

cleeve · Feb 5, 2004

IF YOU THOUGHT THE MX440 IS BETTER, YOU ARE WRONG!

HERE ARE BENCHMARKS:
<A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/index.html" target="_new">http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/index.html</A>

In Tom's VGA guide, the 9200SE beats the MX460 in Unreal Tournament 2003, Battlefield 1942, Call of Duty, Warcraft 3, C&C Generals, Halo, Nascar Thunder, X2 the threat, and Aquamark.

The MX460 wins only in Quake3 Arena, and not by much.

None of the benches are won with massive gains mind you, but the answer is clear: the 9200SE (AKA 9200 64) is a better card than eve the GeforceMX 460, which is better than the GeforceMX 440.

Funny how we all assumed we knew that the MX440 was lots better and none of us actually bothered to check.

________________
Radeon 9500 PRO (hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)
AthlonXP 2600+ (o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)
3dMark03: 4,055

pauldh · Feb 5, 2004

Cleeve, I was looking at that myself and thinking of posting it. But although his $43 price makes it look like it was a SE, I think the card benchmarked is actually a radeon 9200 not a 9200se. It had 250/400 clock speeds and was 128-bit and I think the se's are all 200/400 or 200/333 with only 64-bit mem interface

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9500 Pro, Santa Cruz, Antec 1000AMG, TruePower 430watt

markgun · Feb 5, 2004

I'm not seeing a 9200SE in that benchmark suite, only a 9600SE.

Qui habet aures audiendi audiat

cleeve · Feb 5, 2004

Chrikes! My mistake.

I assumed that the 9200 64 was an SE... the 64 referring to the memory interface, not the memory amount (which it is).

Here's a 9200SE VS a Geforce2 MX 400, closest thing I can find so far:

http://ohls-place.com/nuke/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=12

________________
Radeon 9500 PRO (hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)
AthlonXP 2600+ (o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)
3dMark03: 4,055

hogfather · Feb 5, 2004

Perhaps I was a little harsh. However, there is no SE there (tho fair enough, the 64 tricked me) but the GF2 MX is not a fair comparison at all.

XP2000, 256ddr 2100ram, GF4 MX440, XP Pro

phial · Feb 5, 2004

an 8500le is even better than those, if you can slitl find them.. another name for them is the 9100 as its the exact same card with slight clock speed differences

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>

Ssseth · Feb 5, 2004

I have to pick between these two cards. His wife won't let him buy anything online or spend any more money (yes I know... whiiiii-pish). He's buying a whack of other stuff at the same time and just can't spend any extra.

For everyone out there that says to get somethings else, well he plans on buying a newer video card within the next year when he hasn't spent some money in awhile. This is just to get him by for now and again, both will whip the onboard VIA Unicrome he has now.

I found this review of a motherboard with onboard MX440 and it whips the 9200SE!
I can only imagine now that a dedicated 8x MX440 will beat it even better.

Take a look and let me know what you think:
<A HREF="http://www.ocmodshop.com/ocmodshop.aspx?a=171&p=445" target="_new">http://www.ocmodshop.com/ocmodshop.aspx?a=171&p=445</A>

Now if everyone agrees that I should get the MX440 can you help me pick between these two (they are same price)

Pandex Geforce4 MX440-8X 64MB DDR w/ TV-Out
MSI G4 MX440-T8X 64MB w/ TV-Out

The Pandex is a lesser known name but has a fan on it. The MSI just has a heat sink. I think the fan may be important because it's going into a Micro Mini tower... plus if want to oc it a bit I should have more success?

cleeve · Feb 5, 2004

Well, it looks like the 440 is indeed a good 15% to 25% better than the 9200SE, in light of those onboard benches.

And indeed, a standalone card would perform better than an onboard. So it looks like the MX440 is the way to go.

________________
Radeon 9500 PRO (hardmodded 9500, o/c 322/322)
AthlonXP 2600+ (o/c 2400+ w/143Mhz fsb)
3dMark03: 4,055

9200SE or MX440 ?

Distinguished

Illustrious

Distinguished

Illustrious

Distinguished

Illustrious

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Illustrious

Illustrious

Distinguished

Illustrious

Illustrious

Distinguished

Illustrious

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Illustrious

Share this page